Related Posts

New Healthcare Tax Credit Should Help Small Businesses, Nonprofits

This story is republished from CFOZone, where you’ll find news, analysis and professional networking tools for finance executives.

The Internal Revenue Service recently released some information to help companies take advantage of a tax credit provided by the health reform law.

The IRS estimates that about 4 million businesses qualify, and is sending out notices to as many as possible advising them of the tax break. If you haven’t received anything but believe your company may qualify, here’s what you should know:


The credit is available to companies with fewer than 25 employees with average wages of $50,000 or less. The full credit goes to companies with 10 or fewer employees and average annual wages of $25,000 or less. It is not available to self-employed individuals.

The credit covers 35 percent of an employer’s contribution to employee health premiums, so long as that doesn’t exceed 35 percent of the average cost of a health plan in the small group market. For a tax-exempt organization, the credit is 25 percent. Once the health exchanges are set up, the credit increases to 50 percent for businesses and 35 percent for nonprofits. At that time, the credit will only be available to companies purchasing insurance through the exchange.

A company can use the credit to reduce income tax owed and can carry the credit forward 20 years or back one year after 2010. Nonprofits can use the credit against withholding and Medicare taxes owed on behalf of their employees.

A key caveat is that employers must pay for half of the premium. For most workers, especially low-wage employees, a company that does not pay for at least half the premium is offering insurance that is essentially unaffordable. Even 50 percent is most likely not enough to do low-wage workers much good, especially at small companies where health care premiums are more expensive.

The amount of the credit is based on the premiums an employer pays for, so the more generous the coverage, the greater the credit. While premiums paid for owners and their families cannot be counted, those paid for seasonal workers can be. And the IRS has defined “premiums” broadly: not only does it cover premiums for standard medical insurance but it also applies to dental, long-term care and vision insurance-though again, an employer must pay 50 percent of each premium to count it toward the credit.

Calculating the credit probably requires any small employer to consult an accountant to see if the benefits are worth the cost of providing insurance. The tax credit is in effect, allowing employers who are already thinking about health insurance for their employees to factor in the savings as they plan ahead.

As an observer, I think the key issue is whether the credit is enough to offset the rising cost of health insurance. Those costs have hit small employers the hardest. We’ll see if the tax credit makes a difference in reversing the trend among small employers of dropping health insurance for their employees altogether.

Caring for A Sick Parent Is Not an Excuse for Filing a Tax Return Late, Especially if You’re a Tax Attorney

SO! We’ve been feeling sorry for the IRS lately because well, people HATE the Service. It’s cases like these that might, just might, cause some people to flip their lid.

Kevin Kilduff, one of the “most highly regarded” tax attorneys in Boston was suspended from practicing before the IRS for 48 months by Treasury Secretary’s Appellate Authority after he appealed an administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) decision to suspend him for just 24 months. The complaint was filed by the Office of Professional Responsibility who oversees CPAs, EAs and attorneys who practice before the Service

From the decision of the ALJ, “The Complaint alleges Respondent failed to timely file Federal tax returns for the tax years 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, and failed to file a tax return for tax year 2002.”


Considering the fact that Mr Kilduff used to work at the IRS and since leaving has represented many clients before the Service, so you would expect he would have a good story.

Annnnnnd he did . Two-fold: 1) “[The] matter was instituted as a personal vendetta against him by Revenue Officer 1 because of his “zealous” representation of a client in dealing with Revenue Officer 1, the IRS agent in the case.” and 2) “his mother was diagnosed with Illness 1 and he quit his job in Philadelphia and moved to Boston and moved in with his parents to care for his mother, and remained with them for the next five years. During this period, he and his sister cared for their parents, cooking and taking them to doctor appointments”

Judge Joel Biblowitz, was sympathetic to Mr Kilduff’s situation (re: sick Mom) but was impressed with his attitude (emphasis original):

Throughout the course of this matter, I was struck by the Respondent’s apparent disinterest in, or lack of respect for, this proceeding…In his response, the Respondent stated: “I am happy to provide your office with copies of these tax returns if it is necessary,” although he did not do so. It appears to me that if he truly took the IRS’ complaint seriously, he would have responded immediately after receiving Whitlock’s October 11, 2006 letter and would have sent him a copy of his 2002 Federal tax return, rather than waiting almost four months before responding and offering to provide the return.

Mr Kilduff also didn’t respond to the Judge Biblowitz’s order to notify the OPR of his witnesses and exhibits in his case. Just plain ignored it. If we know anything about judges, it’s that you don’t ignore them.

I find that neither defense has merit. While I can sympathize with the Respondent and his obligations and sacrifices during this period, the record establishes that during the period encompassing tax years 2000 through 2005 he was employed full time for a major laws firm with yearly adjusted gross income ranging from $102,000 to $138,000. Further, while he had obligations caring for his parents during this period, it is difficult to imagine that he could not find the time to prepare and timely file these returns.

IRS Wins 48-Month Suspension of a Lawyer for Failing to File His Own Tax Return and Late Filing [IRS.gov]
Also see:
IRS Suspends One of Boston’s ‘Most Highly Regarded’ Tax Lawyers for 48 Months for Failing to File Tax Returns [TaxProf Blog]
Tax Attorney Suspended from Practicing Before IRS [Web CPA]